i am considering taking classes on portrait photography not sure what would be better digital or film?

Question

Anyone have any tips on this, If I were to go digital what would be a good megapixel count. I want a good sharp quality.

Answer 1

I am a purist Black and white film is the best. I will accept color(professional only nps.npc.nph) please take digital throw it away.

Ansel would definitely agree

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

If I were you, I would learn on digital. Mistakes are very inexpensive. All you have to do is erase them and take another.

If you watch a film of a "professional" taking pictures of models, they all are using cameras with motor driven film advance and taking 3 pics or more per second. For a learner, this would be prohibitively expensive using film, but again, very cheap using digital media.

And lets face it, film is on the way out. Already one camera maker, Hasselblad, (the best name in photography for decades) is making a 39 mega pixel digital camera that creates a finer picture than any but the largest film formats, and I'm talking 8x10 format, something that is seldom used in portrait photography anymore.

As for the camera, if you stick with photography, you are going to buy a different camera if you go professional anyway so I wouldn't be too concerned about buying the best.

Certainly one of the true SLR "35mm like" cameras would be the Great. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji and a number of other vendors have them. All would carry all the features you need to control your photography.

Getting the maximum in mega pixels would also be best, but again, you are going to replace this camera in the future anyway so not a big deal.

If necessary, you could settle for a "35mm like" camera. What I am talking about here is a camera without interchangeable lenses that looks like a 35mm camera. The Fuji s9000, or the Canon Powershot, or Sony DSC would fit the bill. (Both the Powershot and DSC come in different mega pixel sizes.)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/

This link here is the best site I have found for comparing cameras. I copy the info into an excel spreadsheet and highlight the important rows.

Also, if you want to drool, here's a link for the Hasselblad. You can actually buy "digital backs" for a Hasselblad which would allow you to switch back and forth from film to digital. The down size is the $50k such a total outfit would set you back.

http://www.hasselblad.com/
http://www.pictureline.com/category.php?mid=32&cid=208

Many wedding photographers use the hasselblad.

I really think that you can use the digital camera to get your techniques down. Somehow I doubt if you would ever make a transition to film as I suspect even in the professional fields it's use will be decreasing significantly in the near future.

Added:
There was a documentary on PBS tonight about Annie Liebowitz. She is one of the most famous photographers of all time, and there she was using not only a film camera, but a digital camera for her shots.

I would also guess that 100% of news photographers are now using digital. You have to hope that film photography does stick around but a lot of stuff has just died out once better things hit the market. You seldom see a 5 1/2" floppy drive anymore, and someplace it was stated that at least half of the stocks in the DJIA a century ago were for companies no longer in business. Good quality companies like the American Buggy Whip Company!

Answer 4

I believe that every photographer needs a little of both film and digital. Over the years, I am leaning toward digital. It has become more expensive to develop film since I have no room for a darkroom, I have to send my film out to be processed. I went digital two years ago and have never looked back till recently. My digital images are sharp and crystal clear, easier to manage thanks to computers, and in the long run cheaper. Starting off and with prices dropping by the mintue on megapixels I would go with 8 mp. I have a Nikon D80 (10 mp) I love the crisp image quality, rich colors and sharp lines with beautiful depth of field every time. If you need help with reviews try Popular Photography website, it helped me select my camera. Hope I was of some help! Good luck!

Answer 5

Get yourself a D50 or a D80 DSLR. They will pay for themselves in no time vs. film and processing costs. Once you have developed a talent, an eye, and most importantl, a style for portraiture then I would move onto the RZ67 or the Hasselblad.

If you stay with color you can probably stick with digital 12mp or more, but I would recommend a medium format camera for doing b&w. The tonality and sharpness is outstanding.

Another thing people forget about film is that you end up with a hold in your hand, real negative. And that can be scanned into a digital file at anytime.

Enjoy and have fun.

Answer 6

Digital might be better for portraits, simply because of the instant review and massive amounts of pictures you can take in one go. And, concerning mega pixels, they don't make the camera, you should go into a shop and try some out.

Answer 7

DIGITAL or be left in the dust of old film camera's... they are obsolete... don't dheat yourself out of a digital experience.

And get Photoshop if you can afford it... it is the best.

Get minimum 5MP but go for 8MP.(Kodak P880) on their website.

get a prosumer digital... they are cheaper but close to the SLR in style and design. Even with controls.

Proumers alow you to add lens and filters, but the main Zoom lens is sealed keeping danger away from your CCD chip.

I recommend the Kodak P880 or P850. Both way under $500 US. and now you can afford the Photoshop software.
beaux.

Answer 8

I agree with Coach and MereMortal. Even if you ASPIRE to learning film, it makes sense to me to start out as a student on digital. Once you have the equipment, it is free and you can see your results immediately. When I was a puppy, I used to buy 100' rolls of Plus-X or Tri-X and load my own cassettes. This was done to keep the cost down. Back then, it was advertised as "a penny a frame" and that was a pretty accurate claim after you considered buying the chemicals and doing your own processing. I would go out and shoot maybe 100-200 pictures, make some notes, and come back and develop them ALL that night so I could make sense of my results. With digital, you get to see your results on the monitor RIGHT AWAY and you can critically evaluate them as soon as you can get to a computer.

Once you have the idea, if you want to move out of digital, know yourself out and get a film camera. I like the idea of going straight to a medium format at this point, also. You'll know if that's what you want.

If you get a Nikon D80, you will probably start with a kit lens, and the 18-135 DX is a nice place to start. If you want to move on and if you even have a sense that you will switch to film - or just ADD film to your abilities - you can build your lens collection using full format lenses. They will work on digital cameras as well as full format 35 mm film cameras.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=449066&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

Don't forget a memory card:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=353123&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

There. I just spent $1,300 of your dollars and thoroughly enjoyed myself.

If you want to save a few hundred dollars, consider the D50. It is a 6 MP camera and that is quite adequate, but I think the color in the D80 will be better.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=381586&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

Answer 9

2

Answer 10

film would be better... its much more fun to work with than digital pictures.